MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3059858328 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-70957-4

Next generation sequencing-aided comprehensive geographic coverage sheds light on the status of rare and extinct populations of Aporia butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae)

2020· article· en· W3059858328 on OpenAlexaff
Valentina Todisco, Raluca Vodă, Sean W. J. Prosser, Vazrick Nazari

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOulun Yliopisto
KeywordsSubspeciesBiologyTaxonRange (aeronautics)Evolutionary biologyGeographyEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Black-veined White Aporia crataegi (Linnaeus, 1758), a common and widespread butterfly ranging from northwestern Africa to Europe and Asia, has been extinct in Britain since the 1920s and is on a steady decline in several other parts of its range. In order to investigate genetic diversity within A. crataegi and its correspondence with current subspecies-level taxonomy, we barcoded 173 specimens from across its range including, for the first time, extinct populations from Britain and Korea. Using next generation sequencing we also obtained a sequence for Aporia joubini, a peculiar taxon from China known only by its type specimen collected in the early twentieth century. Our phylogenetic analysis placed A. joubini sister to A. oberthuri, although further taxon sampling may reveal a different scheme. Within A. crataegi, we observed a shallow and weak mitogenomic structure with only a few distinct lineages in North Africa, Sicily, Iran, and Japan. Eurasian populations, including those extinct in Britain and Korea, clustered into a large set of closely allied lineages, consistent with a recent expansion during the Late Pleistocene glacial period. This study highlights the importance of museum collections and the unique opportunities they provide in documenting species diversity and helping conservation efforts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207